Since the Justice Department issued its letter of findings, UCLA’s medical school has been weighing how to respond to a federal conclusion that it improperly used race in admissions, as the Trump administration expands its scrutiny of colleges’ selection processes. The findings were described by the Justice Department as part of an intensifying effort to enforce a 2023 Supreme Court ruling that banned affirmative action in college admissions while allowing colleges to consider how applicants’ backgrounds might speak to broader characteristics.
The Justice Department’s determination also escalates a longer-running standoff between the administration and UCLA. Much of the public focus in recent months has been on UCLA’s response to allegations of antisemitic harassment on the main campus, but the new admissions finding shifts attention to how the university screens prospective medical students.
In the letter of findings, Justice Department Civil Rights Division head Harmeet Dhillon said the practices it described resulted in white, Asian, and other applicants being denied admission on the basis of their race. The department also took issue with an application question that invited students to volunteer whether they were part of a marginalized group and then to discuss the impact, according to the department’s description of the application process in 2024 and 2025.
The Justice Department said it supported its conclusions by reviewing admissions outcomes and comparing academic indicators across race and ethnicity. It said data it analyzed showed that admitted students who were Black or Hispanic had lower average grade-point averages and test scores in 2023 and 2024. The department pointed to examples such as a 2024 average GPA of 3.72 for admitted Black students, compared with 3.84 for Asian Americans and 3.83 for white students, as evidence it said indicated use of non-academic factors to pursue diversity goals.
UCLA’s David Geffen School of Medicine responded in writing, saying its admissions process is “based on merit” and that it is committed to complying with state and federal laws. The school said it is reviewing the Justice Department’s findings, a response that signals the university is still assessing how the federal agency characterized its admissions practices.
The case sits in a broader legal and political context for higher-education admissions. The AP report said affirmative action in college admissions has been illegal since the 2023 Supreme Court ruling. The decision said colleges could continue to assess how applicants’ backgrounds might speak to broader characteristics, while Trump administration officials have argued colleges should not use personal statements and other proxies to consider race in admissions, which conservatives view as illegal discrimination.
The Justice Department also described its work as part of a wider enforcement push that began earlier this year. In March, the department opened investigations into possible race-based discrimination in medical school admissions at Stanford, Ohio State and the University of California, San Diego. Before the medical-school investigations, the Trump administration previously targeted undergraduate admissions at selective colleges and demanded that they collect data to show they were complying with the Supreme Court ruling.
AP also reported that the Justice Department’s UCLA inquiry had lasted a year and concluded that the medical school discriminated against white and Asian American students by favoring Black and Hispanic applicants. Penalties, according to the report, could include a loss of federal funding, and the finding was described as setting the stage for a voluntary resolution in which UCLA would adjust its admissions practices to align with the Justice Department’s legal interpretation—or, if no resolution is reached, for potential legal action.
Separately, in March a coalition of 17 Democratic state attorneys general filed a lawsuit challenging a Trump administration policy that requires higher education institutions to collect data showing they are not considering race in admissions. The court fight over the data requirement underscores that universities facing the administration’s enforcement are also confronting procedural disputes over how compliance will be measured and monitored.